I noticed I'm not feeling as tight as i was on.the p.h.a.t routine ...my diet is on key 40/40/20. Only thing that i can think of is lowering carbs since I'm not working every muscle group twice per week...idk mabe its all in my head...what do u guys prefer? Doing muscle groups twice per week or just once?

I noticed I'm not feeling as tight as i was on.the p.h.a.t routine ...my diet is on key 40/40/20. Only thing that i can think of is lowering carbs since I'm not working every muscle group twice per week...idk mabe its all in my head...what do u guys prefer? Doing muscle groups twice per week or just once?

Focus on training Movements and not muscles...watch the diet and stick to Layne Norton's Phat if you so much want to be a Bodybuilder. If you ever want to pursue a different goal, 5/3/1 is good for strength training as well as for mass building.

The thing with carbs is that they are not essential at all, you have to take them according to your need of Glycogen replenishment. If you feel you are not on that big of a caloric expenditure with the Bro-workout, lower kCals in the manner of Carbohydrates but keep Protein and Fat at optimal levels.

I would say test around with yourself, if you do not feel weaker or that you are not enduring as much in this workout, then by all means you could lower carbs a bit if you do not want to gain bodyfat.

Bodypart splits are usually done by advanced bodybuilders due to their great strength and need for tons of volume to stimulate muscle growth. As a consequence, they usually need far more rest than everyone else, so bodypart splits can work for them. Unless you're walking at 260-300, frequency is going to net you the better gains.

EDIT: what Celorza said is also true. The difference in training is going to place different metabolic requirements on your body, so you'll have to adjust your diet/macros accordingly.

Designed by bodybuilder (layne norton) for bodybuilders and those with desires to yield physique improvements. The only difference between a body part split and PHAT is the emphasis on splitting weekly focus and dividing the days between hypertrophic stimulation and strength training.

I also must respectively disagree with the post by toro their are too many variables contributing, those which are not known about the OP, to say that he will benefit from higher frequency as opposed to manipulation of volume and intensity. I also disagree with the fact that body part splits only work for those who are 260-300 due to the need for immense volume. Body part splits are often employed by bodybuilders and those looking to achieve aesthetic goals through the ranks, often with more than favorable outcomes. Body part splits can be manipulated in order to yield high frequency stimulation but as a consequence lower intensities and or volume will be utilized. For the OP it's going to be about trial and error finding what works best for his genetic disposition (fiber density, hormone levels, threshold for recovery, response to diet, response to training in various methodologies, etc.). To make the statement he will see better results from frequency because he's not 260-300 is a complete stab in the dark with no rhyme or reason.

Designed by bodybuilder (layne norton) for bodybuilders and those with desires to yield physique improvements. The only difference between a body part split and PHAT is the emphasis on splitting weekly focus and dividing the days between hypertrophic stimulation and strength training.

I also must respectively disagree with the post by toro their are too many variables contributing, those which are not known about the OP, to say that he will benefit from higher frequency as opposed to manipulation of volume and intensity. I also disagree with the fact that body part splits only work for those who are 260-300 due to the need for immense volume. Body part splits are often employed by bodybuilders and those looking to achieve aesthetic goals through the ranks, often with more than favorable outcomes. Body part splits can be manipulated in order to yield high frequency stimulation but as a consequence lower intensities and or volume will be utilized. For the OP it's going to be about trial and error finding what works best for his genetic disposition (fiber density, hormone levels, threshold for recovery, response to diet, response to training in various methodologies, etc.). To make the statement he will see better results from frequency because he's not 260-300 is a complete stab in the dark with no rhyme or reason.

But you don't disagree with me do yah ? And yeah haha forgot to mention Phat is a bodybuilding routine (The only one beside Power-RepRange-Shock) that also helps with power and dynamic movements !

Nyiron, ya I'm a big fan.of layne norton...sorry i know p.h.a.t is a bodybuilding routine i meant that versus ur typical bodybuilding split my bad...i am going to go back to p.h.a.t even.though i had more of a stress load on my muscles, its worked better for me...its wierd idk y i would feel more flabby going back to typical split...im not fat ha...im pretty solid at 199-200 pds...ill just need to disect my diet accordingly....ive always used moderate carbs,nvr low carbs..mabe i should try that to tighten back up

I also must respectively disagree with the post by toro their are too many variables contributing, those which are not known about the OP, to say that he will benefit from higher frequency as opposed to manipulation of volume and intensity. I also disagree with the fact that body part splits only work for those who are 260-300 due to the need for immense volume. Body part splits are often employed by bodybuilders and those looking to achieve aesthetic goals through the ranks, often with more than favorable outcomes. Body part splits can be manipulated in order to yield high frequency stimulation but as a consequence lower intensities and or volume will be utilized. For the OP it's going to be about trial and error finding what works best for his genetic disposition (fiber density, hormone levels, threshold for recovery, response to diet, response to training in various methodologies, etc.). To make the statement he will see better results from frequency because he's not 260-300 is a complete stab in the dark with no rhyme or reason.

Strange you disagree yet go on to talk about changing the body part split to utilize higher frequency. To be fair, I didn't specify that I was referring to 1 body part/week-type split, so pardon my vagueness. I still stand by utilizing some degree of higher frequency than working a body part once a week, even if it's 1.5x week (a lot of the best programs work something 1.5x/week).

Strange you disagree yet go on to talk about changing the body part split to utilize higher frequency. To be fair, I didn't specify that I was referring to 1 body part/week-type split, so pardon my vagueness. I still stand by utilizing some degree of higher frequency than working a body part once a week, even if it's 1.5x week (a lot of the best programs work something 1.5x/week).

I go on to speak about higher frequency because of the vagueness of the post. It resinated a point that body part splits don't allow for frequency manipulation. It seemed as if you were saying, for this reason body part splits are not applicable for the OP's goals. That they will only work for those individuals in the 260-300 range because of their need for longer rest periods, hence the 1 day a week thats was associated with body part splits. My comments purpose was to clarify that this was not true. I do apologized if I jumped the gun on just an omission of clarity.

I go on to speak about higher frequency because of the vagueness of the post. It resinated a point that body part splits don't allow for frequency manipulation. It seemed as if you were saying, for this reason body part splits are not applicable for the OP's goals. That they will only work for those individuals in the 260-300 range because of their need for longer rest periods, hence the 1 day a week thats was associated with body part splits. My comments purpose was to clarify that this was not true. I do apologized if I jumped the gun on just an omission of clarity.

It's fine, the onus is on me since I made the mistake of not being so clear. I have somewhat of an addiction to the forum (well, maybe that's unfair but I definitely enjoy this forum), and as I often post in between tasks at work sometimes I make a rushed response.

Nyiron, ya I'm a big fan.of layne norton...sorry i know p.h.a.t is a bodybuilding routine i meant that versus ur typical bodybuilding split my bad...i am going to go back to p.h.a.t even.though i had more of a stress load on my muscles, its worked better for me...its wierd idk y i would feel more flabby going back to typical split...im not fat ha...im pretty solid at 199-200 pds...ill just need to disect my diet accordingly....ive always used moderate carbs,nvr low carbs..mabe i should try that to tighten back up

1. "You will also find that your strength will start to skyrocket! I do recommend deloading once every 6-12 weeks however. A deload would consist of 1-3 weeks of lifting at 60-70% of your normal weights. This will be enough to maintain your strength, but light enough to allow you to actively recover."

Just be sure to utilize the de-load process if you are going to continuously follow PHAT as your training regiment. Also, don't be afraid to play around with your methodologies and approaches. I can honestly say I have never strictly followed anyone else's established program to a T, as there are so many contributing factors that need to be tailored based off of your own physiology, and no one can determine these for you. Bodybuilding is a huge experiment, if you will, where you are the lab rat, the scientist, the gym is your lab and weights/food are your tools. Just one of the reasons I love it so much.

It's fine, the onus is on me since I made the mistake of not being so clear. I have somewhat of an addiction to the forum (well, maybe that's unfair but I definitely enjoy this forum), and as I often post in between tasks at work sometimes I make a rushed response.

I hear you on that, it is a great establishment. I must say I do enjoy posting myself, in my efforts to provide sources to back my statements I often come across various studies and expand my own knowledge, as i get side tracked by interesting abstracts.